Category: feminism

Did you dislike the new Ghostbusters film? If so, you’re an overweight, virginal, Ku Klux Klan, basement dwelling, toy-unboxer who hates women and black people. Remember, you aren’t allowed to have your own opinions if they contradict against feminism. Let us listen to Scientist Man as he analyzes and explains the new Ghostbusters film in great detail:

If you have some extra time, feel free to enjoy this Half in the Bag episode:

Some of the best comments:

It’s simply amazing that a film like Ghostbusters was politicized and turned into some sort of fight against “misogyny” and “patriarchy.” This is where we’re at; this is where feminists have brought us. What came first: the feminist angle or just a bad film? Why not both at the same time?

Like this:

Have you always wanted to know how much of a bigoted, xenophobic, racist that you are? Now there’s a convenient quiz for you to take at CheckMyPrivilege.com! Isn’t this just wonderful comrade? This website has many more amazing features such as:

The Bill Split Calculator–Never again will you have to argue with your friends about how much the more privileged should have to chip in for the pizza because of their oppressive positions! Simply have your friends all Check Their Privilege, save their scores on the results page, and use the Calculator to determine how much they each owe! It couldn’t be simpler!

Campus Investigation Service-We can save you loads of headache and paperwork by keeping your administrative staff employed. Visit the Campus Investigations page and call today for a free consultation on how we can help you!

It turns out that if you answer the questions with the jist of being a healthy, white, heterosexual male you get a score of 175 with the rank of “Shitlord“! Isn’t good for progressive and tolerant liberals to let you know how much they accept you?

If you’re a healthy, genderqueer, non-working, Middle Eastern, Muslim, homosexual you get a score of -1275.

If you’re a poor, female, cis-gendered, black/white, bisexual teacher you get a score of -875.

Let’s read some testimonials from some proud patrons:

I still cannot believe how much society has lied to me. I used to think that being a white middle-classed German with a penis was ok, and that my life was ok. But since I never identified as a male, and honestly didn’t give a fuck about what gender I am, and am slightly physically hindered by a weak terminal desease, I was so wrong. It must have been the patriarchal internalised agenderphobia that lead me to believe this. Only know have I realised how oppressed I truely am! I will be starting my blog in the next week, visit me there to witness me fighting patriarchal oppression of women and other gender minorities, please. This has changed my life, thank you, checkmyprivilege.com!

Benji

Never in my life have I ever come to the terms with the fact I was a shitlord. Ever since I was born I now realise, I have been oppressing and raping every woman I have ever laid eyes on. Only now do I realise just how oppressing I am despite being an ugly faced, disfigured, bisexual latino all because I was born a man. Thanks checkmyprivilege.com for helping me realise how oppressing I really am to all the woman of the world!

Thank you Check My Privilege for affirming what I have known since 1990. As I continue on my unchecked march toward becoming a plutocrat, I pledge to prey on innocent young men to satiate my ravenous sexual appetite.

Priveleged Shit Baroness

As always, be sure to share this with your friends and aid in the re-education. Otherwise, get them some warm clothes and a shovel!

Greetings comrades, tonight we will be exploring a new frontier in social justice: air conditioning. Let’s listen to Comrade Sanghani break it down for us:

Now let’s take a look at what the Communist News Network has to say concerning this issue:

All feminists need to create a most equal society is more power and most importantly, more money. You may not have known before that air conditioning is sexist but now you do. Perhaps a more important question is: what isn’t sexist? What new boundaries will social justice push? What new slights and insults will be discovered? Perhaps gay men are sexist for not wanting to have sex with women? Subscribe to Poor Me! magazine to find out!

These thoughtcriminals dared to scoff at the valiant feminists in the videos. Off to the gulag with them!

Honestly, how is one supposed to satirize such a story? What could I add to make feminism seem any more ridiculous? I could always identify actual restrictions of liberty and persecution for them. How about Iran, where it is a matter of national policy to follow Sharia and execute homosexuals? We could look at South Africa, where one in four men admit to committing rape? I guess that it’s the white man’s fault that Iran executes homosexuals. Based upon one of the Puffington Host articles I found about South Africa that’s what progressives seem to be doing:

“The South African Constitution is arguable one of the most progressive constitutions in the world, for innumerable reasons, but for the purposes of this blog post, I want to focus on the fact that Section 9, Subsection 3 specifically prohibits discrimination against people on the basis of their sexual orientation.”

“The problem, though, is that there seems to be a gap in South Africa between the legal realm and the sociocultural realm. And in this gap appears the phenomenon known as ‘corrective’ rape. Corrective rape is a phenomenon wherein a homosexual person is raped as a means of ‘correcting’ their sexual orientation. In most cases, the victims are black lesbians. This phenomenon takes place in other countries as well, but for the purposes of this post I’m focusing on South Africa.”

“In South Africa most cases of corrective rape are against black lesbians, and I’m going to analyze this phenomenon in the context of a post-apartheid South Africa deeply embedded in a culture of heteronormativity. I read a very enlightening article by Megan Morrissey in the journal Womyn’s Studies in Communication, which talks about the discourse among black South Africans around corrective rape. In the article Morrissey discusses the common argument from black Africans that the practice of homosexuality is un-African, something brought about during colonization. ”

“Many people quoted and interviewed in the article state that homosexuality is exclusive to the white man and his culture. By distancing black African culture from homosexuality, these people marginalize black gay Africans from their own culture. There is a further alienation of black lesbians, who would only be allowed back into the larger culture if their non-normative sexual orientation changed. So men subject these womyn to corrective rape as a ‘rite of passage’ back into the culture, because they believe that this act would force these womyn to ‘submit,’ become heterosexual, and assume their ‘proper’ role in society. ”

Even though the crime is being committed by someone else, the evil white man is to blame for someone else’s culture.

“In South Africa, homosexuality is associated with white culture, and because of the years of apartheid rule, there exist tensions between black and white cultures in South Africa. Homophobia and violence, in the form of corrective rape, is a means to marginalize the white culture and regain a nationalistic identity that they believe was stolen from them due to years of colonization and apartheid.

Corrective rape is thus, on a very general level, a post-colonial and post-apartheid reaction to the white culture in South Africa. This explanation does not excuse their actions, but is does trace the violence back to the source. The question is: What next? The reason that corrective rape has persisted is that there has been a cultural, social, and even legal normalization and acceptance of the practice.”

So, black South Africans are doing what they did before the British Empire pushed the Boer Republics and black African nations together in the same country? This is the fault of the Dutch, Boer Republics, and British? Amazing logic.

“There needs to be a cultural and social resocialization and subsequent normalization of homosexuality in South Africa, and the first step toward ensuring that the citizens accept non-normative sexuality is to show that the state supports it. To do that, the state needs to provide legal and political recourse for victims and survivors of corrective rape in South Africa.”

So South Africa needs to undergo “resocialization” does it? I thought that progressives believed that “indigenous” cultures should be left alone? The author, Ms. Okafor, doesn’t seem to realize that politics follows culture. Ms. Okafor might not also realize that reality doesn’t work like McMaster University. South Africa is acrime-ridden hellhole, and that’s probably not changing anytime soon.

Continuing on from my last post concerning Safe Spaces we’re going to take a look at the Safe Spaces that are provided at the University of Pennsylvania. Let’s take a look at how progressives are accelerating the Balkanization of the United States:

Remember folks, it’s racist for “white” people to form any similar association.

This man could go to his Safe Space and continue to not critically think about differing opinions. Don’t you want to be just like him?

Who’s allowed in your safe space? More importantly, who’s not allowed in your safe space? Obviously, critical thinking is not allowed on safe spaces at Mizzou.

Remember, you don’t have the right to take photos in a public space according to progressives. The First Amendment (and the Constitution in general) is not important to progressives. Freedom and liberty do not matter, just you giving up your money for their demands. I’ll respect their space, with a sledgehammer…

Here are some quotable quotes:

“I know that you better back up…”

“My name is ConcernedStudent1950…”

“I’m gonna call the police on you…”

“I need some muscle over here!”

I think that I’ll declare February to be German History Month. Who’s with me?

Feminists have achieved another victory in the People’s Republic of California. Senate Bill 358 was just signed by Governor Moonbeam Brown, under which “Female workers in California will get new tools to challenge gender-based wage gaps…”

One of the most interesting parts to note about this bill is that employers accused of discrimination will have to prove themselves innocent, which is the complete opposite of how the U.S. Justice System is supposed to work. Men are no longer innocent until proven guilty under this legislation.

“The bill by Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson, a Santa Barbara Democrat, expands California’s existing equal pay law and goes further than federal law by placing the burden on the employer to prove a man’s higher pay is based on factors other than gender.”

No longer is it the burden on the accuser or prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that one is guilty. The burden of proof is now on the accused. Let’s look at more of what is in this news article.

“‘The stratification and the pay disparities in California and in America, probably in the world, are something that really eats away at our whole society,’ Brown said…”

Has Governor Brown looked into why there are “pay disparities” in the workplace? Is it really that businesses simply pay women less for doing the same work as men? Why would so many business waste their time hiring men if this was true? Capitalists are evil and money-grubbing in the eyes of progressives right? I suppose that doesn’t apply if we’re talking about the Patriarchy. Damned male privilege.

It’s also interesting that progressives never really talk about liberty or freedom that often. They’re more likely to use the words equality or fairness. I think that this shows where the priorities of progressives lie. It’s not about allowing individual citizens to make their own choices, but rather, a guaranteed equality of results. If the government has to use significant force to do what progressives believe should be done, so be it. Let’s look at what Ezra Klein had to say about liberty in her article: “Yes Means Yes” is a terrible law, and I completely support it.

“Every discussion of the Yes Means Yes law needs to begin with a simple number: A 2007 study by the Department of Justice found that one in five women is the victim of an attempted or completed sexual assault while in college.

“Critics worry that colleges will fill with cases in which campus boards convict young men (and, occasionally, young women) of sexual assault for genuinely ambiguous situations. Sadly, that’s necessary for the law’s success.”

What business do college administrators have in adjudicating any such matters? Rape is a matter for courts to deal with, not for college administrators to decide that someone needs to be deprived of their liberty. She is just talking about “sexual assault” and not rape though. What does Ms. Klein define as sexual assault? The innocent being punished doesn’t seem to matter to feminists.

“Or take another common situation: consent that may or may not have been delivered by someone who may or may not have been too drunk to deliver it.”

What if they’re both drunk? Is no one able to give consent? Did they rape each other? Why would the onus be on just the man?

“Then there’s the true nightmare scenario: completely false accusations of rape by someone who did offer consent, but now wants to take it back. I don’t want to say these kinds of false accusations never happen, because they do happen, and they’re awful. But they happen very, very rarely.”

Of course, the author offers no proof to back up her assertions. She’s made it apparent that she doesn’t care how many innocent citizens are imprisoned.

“Colleges have settled into an equilibrium where too little counts as sexual assault, where the ambiguity of consent gives rapists loopholes in which to hide, and forces women to spend their lives afraid.”

The author doesn’t take the time to describe what “sexual assault” is herself. I notice that she only once used the word “rape” in her article, and even then, it was in reference to false accusations. I wonder why? No need for progressives to think of liberty or freedom, the State and Party™ will determine what is best for individual citizens. It’s getting close to the world of Next Tuesday™ in California.

Further down the line, the author claims: “While some of the wage gap can be explained by things such as work patterns, job tenure, race, and marital status, some of it just can’t be explained by different life choices or characteristics and instead is likely thanks to discrimination“. The citation for this little gem is a General Accounting Office (GAO) report concerning gender differences in pay. While the author of the ThinkProgress article may claim that discrimination may be the cause for differences in pay (and for once, his source actually controlled for more than one factor) she offers no proof to substantiate this claim. I guess I’m just supposed to take her word on this, because the GAO doesn’t offer proof that discrimination is the cause. On page six they write the following:

In other words, Ms. Covert is implying a conclusion that the data does not claim. The Factual Feminist (a.k.a Christina Hoff Sommers) wrote an interesting piece on the Huffington Post concerning the “gender wage gap” that progressives just can’t ever shut up about. This article uses data from the fine folks at the AAUW to disprove the claim that women make 77% of what men do for the same work. As it turns out, you really do have to control for relevant factors to fully understand what the data is telling you. A man who has to support a wife and several children might work a few extra hours, which would explain the extra money made by married men that ThinkProgress laments so much. Let’s hear some more fun facts about the gender pay gap from Dear Leader and Comrade Carney:

Let’s here some more thoughts on why the wage gap exists and how it’s not the way feminists portray it:

For all of the feminists who claim that life is easier just because you’re a man, have you ever tried to live as a man does? A lesbian woman who decided to become a man for over a year turned back into a woman. Feminists certainly aren’t interested in liberty, but do they even want equality or just special privileges? Do progressives actually care about the suffering of all people equally? Or is it just special interest groups, votes, and power that matter to socialists/feminists/progressives?

This man is not a simp, but rather a valiant warrior fighting against the Patriarchy.

Understandably, Anheuser-Busch InBev has pulled this marketing slogan. In a recent statement, Alexander Lambrecht, Vice-President for Bud Light of Anheuser-Busch, said, “It’s clear that this message missed the mark, and we regret it. We would never condone disrespectful or irresponsible behavior.” This is clearly not enough to assuage any guilt, much more must be done to show faith and penance to the Party. Monetary donations are in order, large donations. Possible recipients for any Capitalist Exploitation Units would be: Emma Watson’s (worth US $60 million) HeForMe campaign, the Clinton Foundation, and/or Al Gore’s carbon footprint.

Here are some arguments from typical RethugliKKKans, Losertarians, misogynists, incest supporters, rape apologists, and other miscellaneous Neanderthals . They are not to be viewed except through approved Party channels that will only deride the content and take any and all statements out of context.

As always, post up any government censored and Party approved comments below.